Messages

Thanks for taking the time to answer, just interested is all.  Considering AGS was started by Mr. Jones in 1997 it's probably long overdue for an overhaul :-)  Not underestimating the amount of work it takes (as I'm a programmer by trade).

I'm kind of curious about something.  Please forgive me as I don't know the inner workings of how save games and patching and all that works.  I'm just wondering why there's a problem with loading saved games that "break" with newer patches.  How come the game can't detect that you have an old save, and convert it appropriately to one that doesn't break the engine, and do it seamlessly so it looks like to the player that it worked as it always did?

I'm not assuming that it would be easy or simple, I'm just asking how come you have such a problem reading old save games and converting them to the new format?

Also another suggestion (which I hope doesn't make anyone angry, again I'm not assuming it will be simple, easy, or quick to make) but why not start working on a rewrite of the engine that fixes the issues outlined here, that will take care of the resolutions and d3d and what not (maybe open-gl support, and backup support in direct draw or whatever).  No change in the editor, but starting with the engine a complete rewrite which would allow 8-bit palletized color all the way up to 32-bit (maybe even some support for 4-bit color [16 color palettes] -- not that it would be native but it could be faked), any resolutions or aspect ratios you might need, etc...  Later you could add other scripting languages too so that programmers versed in whatever you used (say lua) would be able to use AGS?  Again I'm not saying this would be easy, simple, or quick to make, but why not start on that, that works with the existing editor and scripting language.  Would eventually solve a lot of problems and allow a lot more people to use it (maybe you don't want that many more people using it).

Again, I'm not trying to be a jerk or make anyone angry, I'm just curious.

Thanks for the suggestion Miguel, I'll keep it in mind.

I don't plan on selling any of it.  You're obviously right about IP rights and so forth, however, a lot of those in the forums are pretty well received.  So I may risk releasing them.

Even if I don't release them, I'm well aware there's a lot of work involved.  Of course the idea is that the design is all done, and for the most part so is the production design (that is the look and feel).  You know how art schools (I don't know if they do it anymore) have students recreate Renaissance artists masterpieces?  I see this as sort of the same thing. 

For instance, if I decide to do Simon 3, I'm going to actually be taking sprites from 1 and 2, and modifying them to match 3.  Also going to take backgrounds in an effort to make it look like it was made by the same people and process of the first 2.  At the same time I'm sure there's going to be some original art I'm going to have to make, that will have to fit in with that existing material.  It will help me learn the craft of adventure game development, and get me in the mindset.

Let's set aside legality, because I will never sell them, I may release them for free depending, or I may not release them publicly at all.  I'm not going to be ignorant of IP law, but I'm not so worried about it right away, we'll see if I just get through making one first.  In any case here's my plan, make a few demakes -- as most suggested in here you're actually trying to simulate earlier design/art from a later game, which means (potentially) less art than their original counter parts.  Next I am thinking of doing a few remakes, the reason for this is, I will have to be a little more creative, taking some old adventures, and improving them with art, maybe even design (especially since alot of the early adventures more notably the Sierra ones, have a ton of dead-ends/deaths).  So a demake might be easier/quicker, and then a remake a bit harder, however, like I said the look and game design are already done.  Finally I will make some original games (that weren't games before) based on existing IP (for instance I've always wanted to play a Macgyver tv episode as an adventure game).  What this will do is teach me how to create something original but give me some templates as to what I can and can't do.  For instance like some of the Indy fan games... I think an existing IP still provides a framework in which to contain your adventure game.  A bit better than just doing wholly original stuff, where you may not have any idea of how to visualize and map out stuff.

So TL;DR - I plan on doing a few demakes because design is pre-existing, a few remakes for the same reason but a bit harder since I may be adding extra content, original games off of existing ip because it would still provide a basic framework and focus the games.

Okay by this time, my framework should be fully functioning full graphical point-n-click adventure system (in haxe/openfl), and I will make my own wholly original games.

Btw I'm already making games with the current version of my framework as I build on it.

What I'm hoping is that this will make me a really good adventure game designer.

In any case thanks for all your advice, I'm really taking it to heart, not just throwing it out indiscriminately.

Yeah I was looking into Simon 3.  I'll have to admit I haven't played any of the Simon the Sorcerer games to date, but have bought all 3 of them from GoG -- I also looked and saw someone started on Simon 3 and got as far as a demo (which I also haven't played) so there's that, but I don't think the developer has since worked on it for a few years.

(Basically being in the U.S. I don't know if the Simon games were even available to me, and I think I only heard about them since like the 2000's somewhere) but have been wanting to get them for some time.

Should be fairly interesting.

I'm playing Kyrandia 3 right now, so I have to finish that first, then I will play the Simon games.

So quite a few people are saying demake.  So I think I'll start with that.

It will be a somewhat slow process too, as I have other things and also i'm still working on my framework.  Once I get started, however, there will always be progress, be it at a slow pace.

Edit: Thanks for the suggestions!

Obviously neither does anyone else that does them.  That doesn't seem to stop them, nor does it seem to put off anyone on the boards.  In any case I was considering working on remakes and demakes using ags.  Since the games are already created, I could get intimate with the process.  Also "Also demakes require a lot of art and I can't find anything you've drawn." -- as if anything I've drawn was a prerequisite to wanting to make them.  I think both remakes and demakes would require a lot of art and animation, which doesn't concern me.  If I decide to do one I will do the art required, regardless of whether anyone thinks it's good or not.

If demakes/remakes are neither better to do first, then it really comes down to choice.

Thanks for the discouragement.

To further work on my adventure game development skills, I'm considering working on both demakes and remakes, and then also original games based on already existing properties.

I would like to know what would be better/easier to START WITH, remakes or demakes?

And could you please explain why you feel one way or the other.

Interesting methods for sure.  Just wish we could get more people in on this thread.  I'm essentially building my own adventure game framework.  At the moment I can only do choose-your-own-adventures with it (very basic, hyper-card-like games).  So I intend to add a new feature to the framework with each game I build.  Eventually it should be it's own full graphic-adventure game framework.

Still having problems on how to start my own.  Not using ags simply so i can start from the ground up.  Although I"m also toying with the idea of demakes, remakes, and original games built on existing properties.  Of course my goal for doing said games would be to teach myself how to create adventure games, not necessarily for the fan-factor.  (For instance making a fan-game of star wars simply because I'm a fan of it).

I'm not technically an artist, but am a fan of classic American animation, and am also trying to learn how to do a bit of pixel art, so you can take the advice with a grain of salt.

First forget about the "shopped" blur -- It just looks weird, mainly because you have a style that looks like it was colored with crayon and drawn in pen (I'm not trying to put down the artwork for being in crayon, I'm saying it's what the surface looks like, and if you take offense you can say it looks like maybe chalk pastels or something).

Okay secondly as far as perspective and what not goes, Your front tree looks as big as your mountain.  My suggestion would be to push the mountain way back into the background by making it smaller, and putting it higher on the screen.  Make sure the front tree is complete and doesn't look like it's behind the mountain.  In fact for scale I would probably create dark (black?) tiny tree silhouettes around the mountain.   I realize there's supposed to be a cliff there but I would put the grass over there to where in the image it's actually just above the sign, to make it feel like it goes a long way back behind the sign.  If you really want to leave cliff and mountain like that, make the mountain even bigger to where it actually goes off the top of the image, and make the moon smaller, while also making the mountain much much darker.

As far as characters with busy backgrounds such as these you might want simpler looking sprites that sort of contrast, think Walt Disney's Sleeping Beauty with backgrounds by Eyvind Earle -- http://theartofsleepingbeauty.tumblr.com/image/4088137776 -- and then how the sprites were simple and angled, which stood out from the backgrounds.  That's what you want to go for.

Forgive me if this seems in any way confusing.  To the rest of the Critic's Lounge, please forgive any bad advice I may have inadvertently given.

The sign is a bit too noisy, if you look at the "Van" in the sign the lines on the end make it look like "Vanil" -- so maybe make the texture lines less prominant.

I didn't know this kind of thing was possible in AGS.  I mean from the videos it looks pretty fast.

Would anyone mind explaining how they make their adventure games?  Do you start with characters, a plot, a mock-up?  What do you normally do to actually create your adventure games?

Please let me know because I'm interested in how everyone approaches it.

Where to call your code from it just says "function x..." --

But I'm assuming the call to "Got There" is going to be in the event handler for the object or hotspot in question?

I'm unsure how to import an scm module.  Also where to stick the code for it?

Also like I said, if I turn on eBlock, then it will walk but ignore the interaction.

Yeah I believe I did set a walkto point for the hotspot

I don't know if there's a walkto point for an object though.

Also using eblock means I can't do anything else while he's walking, when the player should be able to exit out of the current action at any time (unless this is impossible to do with ags)

I set up a hotspot, and was trying to get it to walk there before interacting with it.  There was a problem because if I was using the walk cursor, it wouldn't interact, and the interact cursor wouldn't walk.  So I solved it by writing code in the global script that basically made the pc walk, and then process click, and it worked fine.

However when I cut the code from that hotspot and tried to put it into an object's code, it will interact directly without walking over there, and if I comment out the line ProcessClick he will walk to the position but not interact with it at all.

So basically I want it to walk to the object I clicked on, and then do the interactions.  Below is some code.

please note this is in GlobalScript.asc:

Code: AGS

function on_mouse_click(MouseButton button) // called when a mouse button is clicked. button is either LEFT or RIGHT
{	
	if (IsGamePaused() == 1) // Game is paused, so do nothing (ie. don't allow mouse click)
	{
	}
	else if (button == eMouseLeft) 
	{
		if( gPieMain01.Visible == false )
		{
			gPieMain01.SetPosition( mouse.x - (gPieMain01.Width / 2),  mouse.y - (gPieMain01.Height / 2) );
			
			if( gPieMain01.X < -44 ) gPieMain01.X = -44;
			if( gPieMain01.Y < 60 - 44 ) gPieMain01.Y = 60 - 44;
			
			if( gPieMain01.X + gPieMain01.Width - 44 > 640 ) gPieMain01.X = (640 - gPieMain01.Width) + 44;
			if( gPieMain01.Y + gPieMain01.Height - 44 > 420 ) gPieMain01.Y = (420 - gPieMain01.Height) + 44;
			
			gPieTextOverlay.X = gPieMain01.X - 64;
			gPieTextOverlay.Y = gPieMain01.Y - 64;
			
			//if( (gPieMain01.Y + gPieMain01.Height) > 420 ) gPieMain01.Y = 420 - gPieMain01.Height;

			gPieMain01.Visible = true;
			gPieTextOverlay.Visible = true;
			
			startx = gPieMain01.X + (gPieMain01.Width / 2);
			starty = gPieMain01.Y + (gPieMain01.Height / 2);
		}
		else
		{
			pieOption = subOption;
			if( mouse.x > (gPieMain01.X + 54) && mouse.x < ( (gPieMain01.X + gPieMain01.Width) - 54) )
			{
				if( mouse.y > (gPieMain01.Y + 54) && mouse.y < ( (gPieMain01.Y + gPieMain01.Height) - 54) )
				{
					pieOption = 0;
				}
			}
			
			clear_screen();
			gPieMain01.Visible = false;
			gPieTextOverlay.Visible = false;
			cEgo.Walk(mouse.x + GetViewportX(), mouse.y + GetViewportY());
			ProcessClick(startx, starty, eModeInteract);
		}
	}

}

This next code is in the room script:

Code: AGS

function hPainting_AnyClick()
{

}

function hCrystalBall_AnyClick()
{
}

function oPainting_AnyClick()
{
	if(pieOption == 0)
	{
	}
	else
	if(pieOption == 11)  // look at
	{
		if( lookAtCount == 0)
		{
			lookAtCount++;
			cEgo.Say("It's a painting of a top-down view of the room.");
		}
		else
		if( lookAtCount == 1)
		{
			lookAtCount++;
			cEgo.Say("This was taken...er..painted before a few additions,"); 
			cEgo.Say(" like the rocking chair and the giant crystal ball.");
		}
		else
		if( lookAtCount == 2)
		{
			lookAtCount++;
			cEgo.Say("So it's actually a painting of a rug!");
			cEgo.Say("I love that rug.");
			cEgo.Say("Of course this was also before the rug was moved in front of the fireplace.");
		}
		else
		{
			int randLook = Random(2);
			
			if(randLook == 0)
				cEgo.Say("You don't need me to describe it for you!");
			else
			if(randLook == 1)
				cEgo.Say("You've already seen the painting.");
			else
			if(randLook == 2)
				cEgo.Say("It's the same painting you've looked at several times before.");
		}
	}
}

The hotspot is of course hPainting, the object being oPainting.

Any ideas?

Can you make a hotspot have an animation (or view) associated with it?  Or do I need to make it an object for it to be animated?

Thanks Khris although I had to leave off the "eBlock" part as I need it to go back to the script to check if the correct option was clicked

Last Monday I managed to upload a video of the UI handling edges.



Next up were some layout drawings of the first room.  Or rather the only room in this one-room demo, which will show you how to use the interface:






On Tuesday I redid my first and second puzzles and then did a sketch for the background that's a temp background.

Click here for the "full effect"

Wednesday I implemented the background in AGS and added labels to the gui buttons.

For some reason Youtube decided to start cropping my videos to conform with their wide resolutions more.

Thursday and Friday I was trying to implement a few things but got stuck.  I'm now unstuck but you won't really see it until next week, unless you happen to go to my blog.

Okay so when I switch to the interact cursor mode, the hotspots work but now he won't walk around the screen.  Is there a way I can do both on one cursor?

I suppose I could check when he stopped moving with the Moving property, then switch to the interact mode until after he's selected an option, and then switch back to walk mode.  A bit cumbersome, and I would have to set it back to walk mode after every call to hotspot click events.

i created some hotspots, and generated "any click" events for them in the room script but they don't seem to do anything.

I think it has either something to do with my gui's (these are only for display, as I turned off the clickable properties, and just set their visibility flags in scripts), or the cursors.  The gui is a custom gui I created that pops up whenever a user clicks anywhere (it pops up like i said in script via the visibility flag).  I'm using the walk-to cursor only right now as I'm not doing the typical user interface.  I read somewhere about setting a certain cursor to allow interaction (the interact cursor maybe?)